JUDGMENT S. Sunil Dutt Yadav J. - Petitioners have sought for issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondent No.3 to consider the representations dated 24.12.2022 at Annexure-E, E1, E2, E3 and to accept the surrender of medical seat allotted to petitioners. 2. It is the case of the petitioners that respondent No.3 has withheld the original documents submitted by petitioners at the time of second round of counselling. It is submitted that the petitioners desire to participate in the counselling process elsewhere in other states and hence, desire to obtain the original documents that have been submitted. 3. Learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that in terms of Clause 4.2.4 of the University Grants Commission Notification of October-2018, there is an embargo on taking the certificates into institutional custody under any circumstance or pretext. 4. Sri. K.M.Prakash, learned counsel appearing for the Karnataka Examination Authority submits that the surrender of seats has the effect of depriving the other deserving meritorious students an opportunity and any permission granted for returning of original documents would encourage the practice of surrendering of seats to the detriment of other meritorious students. He further submits that the embargo as pointed out in the notification of October, 2018 would not apply to KEA. 5. Heard both sides. 6. No doubt, the UGC Regulation refers to higher educational institutions and the retention of original certificates by them as also complaints regarding non-refund of fees. However, what would apply to higher educational institution would more so apply to the KEA. Unless there is a legal provision for withholding of original documents, the KEA also cannot withhold the documents. There is no rule shown to us, which provides that KEA could withhold the original records in the institutional custody. 7. It also comes out from the submission made by the learned counsel for the KEA that such practice would result in misuse of opportunities granted and would result in meritorious students losing out on an opportunity to exercise an option as regards such seats which are surrendered later. In public interest, if it is so found appropriate, it is always open for the respondent - State and other authorities to take note of the same and formulate necessary executive / legislative procedure to take care of such practices, if there are certain loopholes being exploited for commercial gain. 8. In public interest, if it is so found appropriate, it is always open for the respondent - State and other authorities to take note of the same and formulate necessary executive / legislative procedure to take care of such practices, if there are certain loopholes being exploited for commercial gain. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The representations at Annexures-E, E1, E2 and E3 are directed to be considered in the affirmative and necessary documents be returned forthwith by today itself. 9. Needless to state that in light of cancellation of seats, forfeiture of fees and penalty as per existing Rules would apply. 10. Copy of this order to be furnished to learned counsel for both parties.